Confederations Cup TV failure is just another lost opportunity for U.S. soccer.

By Jerry Langdon
Gannett News Service

(Tuesday, August 31, 1999) -- The feeling is practically unanimous within
American soccer circles: a great chance was lost to promote the sport with the
failure to show the recent Confederations Cup on United States television
except to a few scattered enclaves.

"A missed opportunity," said an ESPN official, who declined to be identified.

"We have to get to the stage where we get good enough ratings so our sponsors can exercise
leverage," said United States Soccer Federation secretary-general Hank Steinbrecher.

"We did the best we could," said TV rights winner Innovative Sports Marketing partner Doug
Jacobs.

No comment was available from world soccer governing body FIFA's marketing agency, ISL.

The telecasts -- involving the greatest sustained showing ever by a U.S. team
in finishing third -- wound up being shown to a network of about 500 bars
(mainly catering to Hispanics) across the United States, just three cable
outlets (two in southern California, one in northern Virginia) via
pay-per-view, in addition to Echo Star Communicationsí Dish Network and
National Programming Service. Total possible viewing audience: less than 5
million.

Total viewing audience: not available.

The absence of the contests even on pay-TV to most of the country was
particularly aggravating. Innovative Sports Marketing of Hoboken, N.J., got the
contract, outbidding Telemundo, with others including ESPN and Univision taking
a pass. No figure has been announced, but U.S. Soccer officials have been
quoted as saying it would have cost $750,000 to get the rights -- and probably
add another $250,000 for production costs.

Jacobs said his firm didn't get the rights from ISL until four weeks before the
tournament. "That wasn't enough time for cable networks to get the slots
cleared and promote it," he said. "We didn't speak with ISL until May."

He was quoted by Soccer America: "It was really a question of lead time,
and FIFA not really understanding the market here."

Why so late?

We tried without success to get comment from ISL, being bounced from its U.S.
offices in Connecticut overseas to Switzerland, then to England, where messages
were left for two straight days with executive David Schiller and not returned.

Steinbrecher said he would not have approved a $1 million proposal if it came
across his desk. Should U.S. Soccer have been involved? Would a tournament
involving the United States -- as well as Brazil, Mexico and Germany -- be a
chance to show that soccer can draw good ratings?

What about Major League Soccer, where MetroStars owner Stuart Subotnick
complained there wasn't enough publicity about the Confederations Cup and MLS
players' involvement? Improved marketing is supposed to be a prime reason for
the naming of new MLS commissioner Don Garber. Would helping sponsor such a
tournament come under the "marketing" label?

What about ESPN or ESPN2, looking for an indirect way of boosting dismal MLS ratings?

Couldn't someone have gotten the three entities -- U.S. Soccer, MLS, and ESPN
-- together for a joint sponsorship package? And shouldn't ISL be talking to
Innovative Sports Marketing before May, so at least there would be a better
chance to get the U.S. games on pay-TV? FIFA wants soccer to flourish in the
United States. Not showing U.S. national team games to a substantial audience
didn't help the cause.

It isn't enough for U.S. Soccer and marketing representative IMG to say this is
a FIFA event. We have representation in FIFA. We have in the last five years
operated the two most commercially successful World Cups in history. That
should give us some juice. What do we say about the Gold Cup -- that it's a
CONCACAF event and we have no say?

The cable systems aren't without blame, either. Many have vacant channels.
Promotion? A notice in the sports TV schedule section of the newspaper. Nothing
exhaustive. Soccer people don't need to be hit on the head to find the sport on
television.

The Confederations Cup could have been an acid test about whether soccer is a
viable TV commodity in the United States. A lot of people don't think it is --
other than for World Cups -- with the average rating for U.S. men's games in
recent years 1.7, according to U.S. Soccer.

Maybe there just aren't that many soccer fans here. E-mails and phone calls and
letters to U.S. Soccer and the networks won't do much good. People have to
watch games when they are available, be measured by Neilsen, build up a track
record. A golden opportunity was lost in late July and early August that could
have helped do just that.